News Core i5-12400F Shows Strong Gaming Performance in New Benchmarks

[mdd1963]

You either chose the cheaper option, which gimps performance and future proofing or you chose the much more expensive option, for a little more performance (not worth it for that alone only) and future proofing.

I find building an Alder Lake system now you get to chose between 2 bad options. I don't like it at all and I'm glad my upgrade path is Zen3 and Zen3D without missing much performance and being cheaper (soon).

So you are saying that even if 12400F is faster even with just DDR4, you'd choose an AM4 board with DDR4 instead? (I'm hearing a lot of similar reasoning out there....; it's just that I don't understand it. )

 

[VforV]

So you are saying that even if 12400F is faster even with just DDR4, you'd choose an AM4 board with DDR4 instead? (I'm hearing a lot of similar reasoning out there....; it's just that I don't understand it. )

For me the best option is Ryzen (Zen3 or Zen3D) since I am on AM4 already.

For a new system, depends. 12400F is not going to be faster than 5600x, it will maybe match it on average (wait for trusted reviews), which will make AMD drop the price, so in that case you won't see neither a difference in performance nor in price (not much anyway).

If AMD does not drop the price, then yes, for a new system you should go for 12400F with DDR4 for a good budget build, but I think 5600x will be $250 (possibly lower or a 5600 for lower price) and then you need to do the math and see CPU+MB+RAM how much of a difference it actually is between them.

Also, take into account, this is very important, your AM4 will also support the upcoming Zen3D, which is due in a few months, not 1 year away like Raptor Lake is, so a fast easy upgrade path compared to Alder Lake.

DDR5 is just for those with more money than sense now, but in 1 year from now, then it will make more sense. This was shown by HUB and GN too, same with Win11. Both are too soon, too little and not worth it.

 

[TerryLaze]

Also, take into account, this is very important, your AM4 will also support the upcoming Zen3D, which is due in a few months, not 1 year away like Raptor Lake is, so a fast easy upgrade path compared to Alder Lake.

Zen3d will be at least as expensive as the current version is now, so if you have a 5600x (or any other) you are going to pay for that 5600x again just to get it with vcache, and if you wait to sell your old 5600x I doubt that anybody is willing to give you a good deal on it now that z3d is coming out in a few months.
So you will pay close to full price for a CPU you already have to buy it again and possibly not see any difference in performance outside of benchmarks unless you have like an rtx3090 and play games at 1080.

 

[helper800]

Zen3d will be at least as expensive as the current version is now, so if you have a 5600x (or any other) you are going to pay for that 5600x again just to get it with vcache, and if you wait to sell your old 5600x I doubt that anybody is willing to give you a good deal on it now that z3d is coming out in a few months.
So you will pay close to full price for a CPU you already have to buy it again and possibly not see any difference in performance outside of benchmarks unless you have like an rtx3090 and play games at 1080.

He has a 3600, look at his sig. That exact reasoning is also why alder lake is not really an upgrade over current 5000 series processors. They are only really better in the same scenario you lay out.

 

[TerryLaze]

He has a 3600, look at his sig. That exact reasoning is also why alder lake is not really an upgrade over current 5000 series processors. They are only really better in the same scenario you lay out.

For a new system, depends. 12400F is not going to be faster than 5600x, it will maybe match it on average (wait for trusted reviews), which will make AMD drop the price, so in that case you won't see neither a difference in performance nor in price (not much anyway).

He is making his point based on the 5600x I answer based on the 5600x.
The 3600 is even harder to get rid off so everything else still stands except that it's going to be a better upgrade.

 

[King_V]

Yeas AM4 boards also have examples where everything is put to practically infinite.
It's ok if reviews show "out of the box experience" but it is not ok if this is the only thing they show.
A professional should show what a 12 year old would get but also what somebody that does some fine tuning can get.

https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3491-explaining-precision-boost-overdrive-benchmarks-auto-oc

sigh

Yes, yes, there are some that go crazy . . and specifically on PBO. Which does NOT happen by default. You have to choose to do that. It is NOT the default out of box experience.

"also have examples" where you have to specifically opt-in to the feature is not the same thing as "the default that the manufacturer accepts and is straight out of the box."

And using it voids the warranty.

You are comparing something that voids the warranty that the user must particularly go out of their way to choose, to something that is an out-of-box default experience.

Big difference. You are grasping at straws.

 

[TerryLaze]

sigh

Yes, yes, there are some that go crazy . . and specifically on PBO. Which does NOT happen by default. You have to choose to do that. It is NOT the default out of box experience.

"also have examples" where you have to specifically opt-in to the feature is not the same thing as "the default that the manufacturer accepts and is straight out of the box."

And using it voids the warranty.

You are comparing something that voids the warranty that the user must particularly go out of their way to choose, to something that is an out-of-box default experience.

Big difference. You are grasping at straws.

I'm not grasping at anything, read the post you quoted again, all I'm saying is that reviewers should show both and tell people what's what.

 

[Old Molases]

Just Wow!

 

[Why_Me]

Well you are in luck because it seems it is at least as good as a 5600x and probably a little faster. The thing is the intel platform cost will drive up the price for a while making it less of a value proposition than it initially seems. When the b660 motherboards come out and DDR5 becomes reasonable 100 dollars for 16gb or 200 for 32gb, then we are talking huge value over current AMD. I suspect AMD will shift the cost of its current stack by about 20-50 dollars eventually as well though.

Difficult to say atm what the pricing for the B660 w/DDR4 boards will be.

 

[cryoburner]

The article states this 12400F CPU is equipped w/ simply 6 "P" cores, with no 'E" cores....

Why are there only 6 threads? (Is Hyperthreading disabled , crippling it for segmentation , or was that a typo?)

That has to be a typo. Everything I've seen so far has suggested that the 12400 will be a 6-core, 12-thread processor, and the performance results appear to align with that as well. Compared to the 12600K, it just loses the E-Cores, and is limited to lower clocks, but SMT should still be intact.

The error should have probably been caught by this point, considering the article was posted a few days ago and it's stated in the opening line, but really, it shouldn't have got past the editing phase to begin with.

Yeah, but then you are stuck with a DDR4 board and if you wanted better you'd have to get a new board.

Inexpensive DDR4 tends to get better performance than entry-level DDR5 at many common tasks like gaming while costing far less, and it could easily be a couple years or more before faster DDR5 kits get down to a comparable price level. And even then, the real-world performance differences are likely to be imperceptible for most tasks, just as we see today with ultra-high-end DDR4, that is generally not worth the price premium. Rather than putting the money toward DDR5 to pair with one of these i5s, one would likely see notably better performance by using that money to move up to a higher tier processor instead.